But (imperatively, to the layman) an entire cabinet composed of baltic birch with just the baffle being mdf doesnt?! again...
I'm not debating what "looks better" I'm asking why either would be any more or less confusing to someone ordering a cabinet who was not privy to this thread. My hunch is that it wouldn't be a big deal in the first place, and further, any potential questions regarding either choice would be completely eliminated with a two sentence blurb (perhaps right on the assembly instructions) noting the difference.

I just explained my reasoning sir. There is no reason to have one brace made from mdf. But there is a legitimate reason why I would prefer mdf as the exterior baffle....even if everything fit on the same Baltic sheet. Putting a .5" or .75" or 1" roundover on plywood isn't going to be the easiest thing to finish. Even the best plywood layers will have issues with that.

If there was a way I could make it 125% Baltic to ease your mind, I would try. But we'd be pushing against the laws of physics.

As for preorders, there might not be any if the boxes I make don't fit the drivers that those people are secretly holding. I'm making boxes for drivers I can verify from PE. As mentioned many pages ago, if someone has other ideas, now is the time to say it.

I can get a baffle made up using manufacturer specs and ship just the baffle so people can make sure it fits okay, then the box can be built.......out of 100% Baltic.

^ that's completely unnecessary, and worse, inapplicable to what I posted...I quoted part of your 5 paragraph post regarding incorporating mdf into cabinets. If it's "off the table" here, as you suggest above, why bother posting about it? This is after all a thead dedicated to the 18" cabinets you plan to produce. So when I question why a baffle composed out of mdf would look any more or less out of place than a brace within a cab otherwise entirely composed of BB I get the above? Lets talk about:

Most imperatively, yes, you have indicated that a cabinet can be made entirely of BB...but I have yet to read a post stating that's the way you intend to definitively proceed...others have posted here within hours on the very subject. If that's way you're going, great. Done deal, let's go!

As far as input: I think everyone has expressed their views ad nauseam at this point re drivers, cabinet composition, universality of driver openings, etc... there's no reason to even consider the contrary. If people have not responded with any additional information you have requested, I'd be it safe that the demand in that particular area to be low...at least here on the AVS diy forum.

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

would it make any sense to use regular ply/auraco for the bracing? it isn't going to be seen and that would free up the 5x5 baltic for all external panels including a double front baffle and allow for keeping the beefy bracing that will help market the enclosures.

we talked about bracing before and you rightly pointed out that it is not just about maximizing efficiency, it is in part making something that looks cool too. #2 hits the mark on both fronts. while i'm sure it would perform just fine, #1 just doesn't look as cool.

Plywood varies in thickness between batches. Every time a new batch is ordered, they have to measure the thickness and adjust the program accordingly. So using braces from a different plywood might not work very well. MDF is always dead on .75", which is why CNC companies like it. Different batches of ply (even the best of the best) can vary by about .015 in thickness.

That doesn't sound like much at all, but it causes major issues. The rabbet joints are obviously cut to the depth of the wood thickness so they lay flush. If a panel is .015 thinner, then imagine installing the side panels into the rabbet joints. The inside of the box just got .03" narrower. Guess what? Braces don't fit. Opposite if the panels happen to be thicker.

When they cut these on their CNC, they first cut a "key" out of every single piece along with a 3" dado. The machine stops, they take the key and fit it in the dado to make sure it fits okay. If it does, they run the rest of the program. If it's too tight, they run program #2 that gives more slop. If it's too loose, they run program #3 that tightens it up.

This is another reason why it's best to cut as much of the box from one sheet as possible. If they cut all the sides from one batch of wood, then all braces from another batch......they might not be the same thickness.

That's why most commercial plywood boxes have the baffle dropped back about 1" from the front of the box. It keeps things from needing to be dead on flush.

As far as input: I think everyone has expressed their views ad nauseam at this point re drivers, cabinet composition, universality of driver openings, etc... there's no reason to even consider the contrary. If people have not responded with any additional information you have requested, I'd be it safe that the demand in that particular area to be low...at least here on the AVS diy forum.
James

Please point me in the direction where I have been told exactly what box size should be used for a specific woofer, other than the LMS and Dayton 18". As stated many times, I'm not a subwoofer designer and only feel comfortable spending $1000's on exactly what people want. As mentioned before, when someone says to build a box for a 15" woofer, I can do that......700 different ways. When someone says to build a 3 cuft box for a 15" woofer, I can do that 300 different ways. When someone says build a sealed 3 cuft box for the Dayton RS 15 with an option for the 500 watt Yung amplifier cut out......I can get that done by the end of the week.

If you read through this thread from the very beginning, you'll see that I have been struggling to get input on *exactly* what to get cut. So I guess at a box and driver combo and hope for the best.

I had hundreds of pairs of Paul Carmody's Overnight Sensations cut in a very short time, along with many other flat packs. Cake walk. Had he said "Make a small box for a 4" woofer and a 1" tweeter and a port on the back".....guess how long it would have taken? About as long as this thread has been going my friend.

Jeff Bagby contacted me 2 days ago about a design he has using 2 passive radiators, a 12" woofer, and an amp. Yesterday I went to PE and picked up the parts, took them to the CNC company. I'll have a prototype before the week is out. 1 week and a specific design is complete. That's what I've been asking for.

Either way, I'm moving forward with the designs I know will work. If there's any other specific ideas, I'm open for them.

Moving on to the 4 cuft box for the 18" LMS.
20" x 23" x 20" deep will yield about 4 cuft before the driver. Is this okay or should I try to squeeze a little more if possible.
And the 3.5 cuft for the 18" Dayton RS:
Same box, but 21" tall would yield around 3.6 cuft before the driver. Is this okay?
One more question: Are there any suggestions on what driver to put in a box around 2 cuft?

If you don't think there would be much interest in a big box for 15" woofers I wouldn't blame you for not making any. But Dayton actually recommends 5 cu.ft. for the RS and Titanic 15's. Is making a cabinet intended for 18's (is that what the 4.5 will be?) but with cut-outs on the baffles around 14" be a possibility?

Please point me in the direction where I have been told exactly what box size should be used for a specific woofer, other than the LMS and Dayton 18". As stated many times, I'm not a subwoofer designer and only feel comfortable spending $1000's on exactly what people want. As mentioned before, when someone says to build a box for a 15" woofer, I can do that......700 different ways. When someone says to build a 3 cuft box for a 15" woofer, I can do that 300 different ways. When someone says build a sealed 3 cuft box for the Dayton RS 15 with an option for the 500 watt Yung amplifier cut out......I can get that done by the end of the week.
If you read through this thread from the very beginning, you'll see that I have been struggling to get input on *exactly* what to get cut. So I guess at a box and driver combo and hope for the best.
I had hundreds of pairs of Paul Carmody's Overnight Sensations cut in a very short time, along with many other flat packs. Cake walk. Had he said "Make a small box for a 4" woofer and a 1" tweeter and a port on the back".....guess how long it would have taken? About as long as this thread has been going my friend.
Jeff Bagby contacted me 2 days ago about a design he has using 2 passive radiators, a 12" woofer, and an amp. Yesterday I went to PE and picked up the parts, took them to the CNC company. I'll have a prototype before the week is out. 1 week and a specific design is complete. That's what I've been asking for.
Either way, I'm moving forward with the designs I know will work. If there's any other specific ideas, I'm open for them.
LET'S GET THIS PROJECT DONE!!!!

My point is and was: if you HAVEN"T received such information, you can prolly make a safe assumption that there's not a lot of interest in them. Talk is cheap, I'd reason that if people were serious (as they seem to be regarding the 18's) they'd be offering up proposed dimensions/displacements.

Re the 18's: I suppose I'd have to go back and check but I thought Ricci had posted that nearly all the major 18" drivers can utilize the identical cut-out. Perfect.

Then, I think he suggested a handful of cab sizes that would work splendidly with the said drivers. Again, many agree and it seemed like a near perfect route to take.

What else would you like to know re 18" cabinets?

Regarding the 15"s: again, if you're not getting much feedback on them, is it completely out of the question to consider if it's worthwhile to pursue them? Part of my reasoning to cut (4) baffles out of a second sheet of BB was that it would (before I learned of your plans to produce them elsewhere in the chain) dramatically slow the production of 15" cabs that I- gauging from this thread only, primarily- don't anticipate to be nearly as popular.

Erich,
I would suggest this. Try to hit as broadly as possible with these sub kits and don't target them too finely. What I mean is this...Just make 3 maybe 4 basic sealed enclosure sizes. Something like:
1.5 cu ft for 12"
3 cubes for 15"
4 cubes for 18"
Maybe a 6 cu ft (24" cube) for dual 15's or 18's, or even a ported 12 or 15"? Customer can cut their port cutouts.
There is no need for a triple layer baffle. I've put XXX's and ultra's on a single 18mm layer with an 18mm recess panel. 2 layers tops is all that is needed with one layer to recess the driver somewhat. The rest is extra cost in wood, shipping and lost enclosure volume.
As far as driver cutouts the only way I can explain it is this...I have a 4.2 cu ft sealed cab that I test most 18" drivers in. It has a recessed baffle. I have run these drivers through it using the exact same screw holes and baffles with no changes needed.
LMS Ultra
Pro5100
RE SX18
Fi Q18 and SSD
SI HT 18
Dayton RS 18
UXL-18
SSA Xcon
Sundown Zv3
PSI 18
Obsidian 18D2
etc...
A dayton RS drops right into the same cut out from a TC LMSR which drops into the cutout of a Fi driver which drops into the same cutout as a Sundown Zv3 series. These 4 frame types are close enough to be drop ins from 10-18". A LOT of drivers use one of these frames. Just don't make the cutout tight down to the last 1/64th on the frame and they should all fit.
Most 12's 18's and 15's that DIYers are going to use are going to use one of the 3 main open source baskets. All of these are close enough dimensionally to drop in for each other. Additionally there are quite a few other frames that also will drop in just fine because most manufacturers are going to stick with convention and compatible specs. I would suggest getting a representative basket of each type or a dimensional print that you trust and make a cutout for each driver size that fits these frames with perhaps 1/16" of slop just in case. For the recess the outer flange of these frames has a larger variance but not that much. You basically just have to decide whether to clear the common rubber wrap around gasket or not like shown on all of these. This would make your cut-outs compatible with the vast majority of drivers that are going to be used. There will be exceptions of course.
For the cases where the driver is an odd size or for guys who want to roll their own a little more by adding ports or using 4 10" drivers instead of an 18" or put a 15" in the 1.5 cube box or an 18" in the 3 cube or whatever... Perhaps offer a blank baffle option for each enclosure.
My 2 cents.

This.

I'll dig out the cut-outs for a myriad of 15" subs if I can help. Perhaps we'll find a similar case to the 18" scenario: that most will fit within a "standard"...it sounds like there's a damn good chance of such a reality judging on Josh's last paragraph in the above post.

Mods can easily be made to reduce cabinet volume is so desired.

To me, this is the perfect appreciation for the KISS principle.

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

Yes, it is DIY, but the reason many people will be ordering these is because they might not have the tools to alter anything. So ideally we also nail down some very specific designs that are perfect and don't need a rig job. My guess is that anyone spending $50 - $150 on a box wants it to be drop in ready. And that's what I would prefer as well. The majority of these won't be sold to people that already have the woofer sitting around for 3 years with no box. DIY guys will look at the different kits that fit perfectly and choose the one they want. And of course, the boxes can be ordered by themselves too.

I did read Ricci's post and he's right. That's why the 18" LMS box is getting done That method will be fine on some models, but the driver will be sitting on the outside sub flange, which some people would rather not have with the smaller sizes.

I just want to make sure that the original design for each box size has a specific driver that it will fit. That way people will see a complete kit they can order. Then if it happens to also work for some different woofer with a different outer baffle, that's fine too.

You shouldn't have to alter ANYTHING...at least as far as the 18" goes. Ricci has already insisted that all the 18" will work with the same cutout...if it's going to be in-set, simply make sure the outer baffle is large enough to accommodate the driver with the widest mounting flange. I'd bet the WIDEST is no more than 1/16" wider than the narrowest.

From THERE, people can modify if they choose. Perhaps offer a larger cab if there's that much of a demand for it. Again, it should be drop and screw for all of the 18" drivers.

"I did read Ricci's post and he's right. That's why the 18" LMS box is getting done That method will be fine on some models, but the driver will be sitting on the outside sub flange, which some people would rather not have with the smaller sizes.

I just want to make sure that the original design for each box size has a specific driver that it will fit. That way people will see a complete kit they can order. Then if it happens to also work for some different woofer with a different outer baffle, that's fine too."

I will admit that I'm simply not following a bit of this.

the "outside sub flange" has me a bit puzzled. Do you mean it would be very near the inner diameter of the first baffle cut out or that it (the mounting flange) would rest above the inner baffle, on top of the outer baffle? The latter doesn't make sense to me as there would be no reason to make the outer baffle that small.

Onward, ALL of 18" drivers should fit the same cut out, so why would there be a need to make any "driver specific"? Simply list the cab and the 18" drivers that it can accommodate right with it. Offer a second size (cabinet) if doable.

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

I'd offer a 3.5 and 4.0 cube and be done. All I need to know is that the 18" drivers are nearly interchangeable. Again, account for the difference (if any) in mounting flange diameters and ensure the outer baffle can accommodate them.

done!

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

I make sure the bracing goes back pretty far in the box. I think it's over 10" deep with the 3 cuft boxes, but I'll check. I try to make sure the TC Sounds will fit because those seem to be some of the deepest drivers. Once the cross brace gets too far back past the midsection of the box, it would probably make sense to change the bracing to the simpler style I posted a few pages back.

Good deal. I'm a fan of arc type bracing, when pillars in the panel centers are not an option due to the driver motor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erich H

I'll see how much extra volume I can get out of a dual opposed. The one I currently designed was 2.5cuft net. I figured that would be a good size for two 12" Dayton RS drivers or a decent variety of other 12's. I could probably push that up towards 3 cuft and still get all 4 baffles on there. I don't think the box could be made big enough for dual 15's unless we go into a second sheet.

I think maximizing the size of the enclosure out of that single sheet is a good idea for the dual 12". For a single 15" cab the best choice would probably be to maximize what you can get out of one sheet as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erich H

Unless people don't mind the extra expense, or we have a very specific design for a certain woofer. That's why I was hoping for specific designs earlier in the thread. Like the 4cuft 18" LMS or the 3.5 cuft 18" Dayton RS. Those are very specific and won't be a problem. So if I ordered 60 boxes and we wanted 5 different woofers, we'd only have 12 of each (plus more expense for programming and set up). In a situation like that, we should pick one or two specific 15" drivers so they are completely done with Baltic. Then get 4 sheets of mdf cut for other 15" baffles.

I gotta admit I'm confused Erich.

I think you are approaching the designs the wrong way and trying to make things FAR too specific. There should be a couple generic designs and that is it. Not 5 different 15" and 18" baffles and different sizes that vary by 0.5cu ft. This unnecessarily complicates things.

The difference between a 3.5 cu ft and a 4 cu ft sealed box for an 18" driver is negligible in the scheme of things. It certainly does not warrant a completely different kit and cnc program IMHO. The LMS works great in 4 cubes. So does the RS18 HO and the UXL and... What I'm saying is make the 18" sealed cab fit however it does best from a cutting and materials perspective. If it ends up at 3.5 cubes fine, if it ends up at 4.5 cubes great...It will work for the majority of HT drivers people use. You don't need 3 different cabinet volumes for 15's just 1 that works for most.

Why are there going to be specific baffle cut-outs for each individual driver? You aren't pre-drilling mounting holes are you? (Do not.) If it is just the cutout on the inner panel and the frame cutout on the outer baltic mdf carbon fiber glass composite concrete panel, then you really only need 1 universal cut out for 15", 1 18" and 1 12". These should be used on all of the boxes. Option 2 should be blank baffles for each box. If MaxxBassThunder150 joins AVS next month and wants to use your kit with his off size JL 13W7 or XXX 15 he can order the blank baffle and cut it his self. I don't see the problem there. You can't cover every driver with 1 cutout size but you can get most of what's popular. Again not to sound like a broken record here, but you can cover every 15" from: Fi, TC, AE, Mach5, Dayton RS, Dayton Titanic, Stereo Integrity, 90% of Sundown, SSA, Ascendant Audio, Adire discontinued stuff, RE Audio subs except for current XXX, Exodus drivers...etc...With one cutout size. Get the dimensions for the 5 most common driver frames add 1/16th to the dimensions of the largest one and use that as your cut-out. For the frame cutout do the same thing with the rubber gasket on the biggest frame. the smallest ones might have a little play but they will work fine. The flanges on these are typically around 3/4". a 1/8th inch of play is not the end of the world and not worth complicating things with multiple kits and programs and complexity.

I understand this is more complicated than it seems. Truly I do. This is what I think makes most sense and keeps things the simplest. It's what I would do if I were calling the shots in your position. It's your show though I'm just offering my opinion. Eventually you have to decide and move forward on something. If you are looking for specific suggestions on drivers, cabs etc...what are they? You seem to want something involving the LMS and the Dayton RS 18. Here are my cabinet suggestions for these two. I would suggest the exact same 21" cube cabinet for both at right about 4 cubes after bracing and driver. Same baffles too.

This is the same baffle arrangement you are thinking of using one inner layer the driver screws to and one outer. These 4 drivers all have different frames. i know of at least 2 others that drop in as well. I have done nothing to change this box. It has had I don't know how many 18's mounted in it.

Mastermaybe, I think you're just looking too hard for things to debate. I'm being as clear as I know how.

First baffle layer cut at 14" (or whatever). Yeah, it fits lots of things. I want the second baffle layer to fit as close as possible to whatever driver is chosen for the original design. That outer baffle might be 15.5 and recessed .5". It might be 15.25 and recessed .38". I don't know how else I can explain it and I really don't know why you're not seeing it. There can be an outer baffle made with just a 14" hole so random woofers will fit, but they won't be flush mounted.

I fully understand that you don't care about that, but if we are getting outer baffles cut, why not make them exact for a specific kit??? You just want a box with a hole. I can do that on my table saw. I want an option for kit where everything fits perfectly and looks made to order.

As mentioned, I agree with Ricci and that is why the 18" LMS box will be getting made. It can be used with with other models, even though the driver won't be recessed. But on the smaller woofers and boxes, a lot of people want the driver to be as flush mounted if possible. I just said that and I really don't know how else to explain it. You're responding too fast without grasping my intent.

I can't spend much more time on this right now or the other stuff won't get done. At this point, I'm almost wondering if you're messing with my brain!

If anyone has specific woofers for specific box sizes, and maybe a plate amp option, I'm all ears.

Mastermaybe, I think you're just looking too hard for things to debate. I'm being as clear as I know how.
First baffle layer cut at 14" (or whatever). Yeah, it fits lots of things. I want the second baffle layer to fit as close as possible to whatever driver is chosen for the original design. That outer baffle might be 15.5 and recessed .5". It might be 15.25 and recessed .38". I don't know how else I can explain it and I really don't know why you're not seeing it. There can be an outer baffle made with just a 14" hole so random woofers will fit, but they won't be flush mounted.
I fully understand that you don't care about that, but if we are getting outer baffles cut, why not make them exact for a specific kit??? You just want a box with a hole. I can do that on my table saw. I want an option for kit where everything fits perfectly and looks made to order.
As mentioned, I agree with Ricci and that is why the 18" LMS box will be getting made. It can be used with with other models, even though the driver won't be recessed. But on the smaller woofers and boxes, a lot of people want the driver to be as flush mounted if possible. I just said that and I really don't know how else to explain it. You're responding too fast without grasping my intent.
I can't spend much more time on this right now or the other stuff won't get done. At this point, I'm almost wondering if you're messing with my brain!
If anyone has specific woofers for specific box sizes, and maybe a plate amp option, I'm all ears.

I'm certain this is directed at me which is unfortunate because I'm looking to do anything of the sort. Neither is Josh with his essential "re-post" above detailing how what you're anticipating to be a problem should not be at all (thanks for the detail Josh, that I didn't take the time to get into).

I'll step away now.

Best of luck.

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

No, I'm not mad in case anyone is wondering. I just want to get this figured out.

The only reason there's confusion is because we went off on a tangent with me trying to explain why things don't fit on sheets or whatever. I'm confident the CNC company can figure all of that out, so no reason to debate it.

And the more it gets explained over 5 pages, the more complex everything seems.

I know the 18" subwoofer box will fit many different drivers. That's why I said I agree with what Ricci posted.....and why that box will be done. He verified it and it's going to get cut. Done, done.....and done again.

But I've got 3 common 15" woofers at the shop, and they do NOT fit the same recessed cut out. Drop a MFW with no rubber gasket into the cut out for the 15" Titanic and it looks stupid. No one wants to spend $500 on a subwoofer setup that looks rigged. I'm not going to do that.

Imagine this for just one second. I want there to be perfect fitting kits for people to pick from.

3 cuft box for 15's......

The main box gets cut for the 15" Dayton RS. Say 14" cutout on the inner baffle, 15.25" on the outside and recessed .38" It looks perfect, and it's offered as a kit. Sweet. Now I get other baffles made that will fit other 15" drivers. And one of those outer baffles is the same cutout as the inner one (14") so a random driver can be mounted.

I think what you are saying is concerning the outer baffle for the most part correct? In my opinion the recess for the drivers should always be the entire material thickness of the outer baffle. Always. There is no reason to do otherwise other than cosmetically as the surrounds on these protrude a large amount as seen in my pics. Now if you are concerned about the wood edge ring seen around the flange on the drivers like in my pics and want a truly flush finish from the frame edge to the baffle that is a whole other deal. (excuse the cab it has been in a few battles and was never meant to be pretty. ) You made a comment that seems to indicate this is the case and that is probably the cause of most of the confusion. I didn't know you were concerned with this and I'm sure a lot of others didn't pick up on that. I would personally not be concerned with having the flange thickness perfectly flush with the baffle but that is just me. Some guys have much higher visual standards than I.

Also you are correct, there is the large rubber trim ring used on a lot of subs and this adds a lot to both the thickness and the diameter of the frame. Mounting a driver without it such as the Dayton RS into a cutout for this rubber gasket it will be quite a bit smaller and look funny. Yes. Gotcha there. Note that I did not use the rubber trim ring on the drivers in my pics for exactly this reason.

Now we are getting somewhere. If guys want to use the rubber gaskets then this will not work with drivers not having it as far as for the outer baffle cut out. If you decide not to support use of this rubber gasket and just go by the true frame diameter then we are back to many many drivers being able to use the same outer baffle, provided that the thickness of the frame isn't an issue and true flush mounting with the outer baffle isn't required. I don't use the rubber gaskets with recessed drivers typically, for the exact reason above. I don't really care about true flush mounting of the frame lip either but that is just me.

It looks like at this point you should decide one way or the other whether ...A. recess mounting of drivers with rubber gaskets will be supported or not. And B. Whether you will attempt to make the outer baffle a flush mount rather than just a recess. I vote full 1 panel thickness recess regardless of actual frame thickness and NO to the rubber gasket in order to streamline and keep the boxes as simple as possible.

Oh and the random driver method should still use a full recess panel of the outer frame OD either with or without the rubber gasket whichever way you decide. No need to have it be a double thick baffle if not for a recess. If the outer baffle isn't a recess just save the extra wood and weight and go with a single layer and mount directly to that. Nothing else would be needed.

Now if you are concerned about the wood edge ring seen around the flange on the drivers like in my pics and want a truly flush finish from the frame edge to the baffle that is a whole other deal. (excuse the cab it has been in a few battles and was never meant to be pretty. redface.gif ) You made a comment that seems to indicate this is the case and that is probably the cause of most of the confusion. I didn't know you were concerned with this and I'm sure a lot of others didn't pick up on that. I would personally not be concerned with having the flange thickness perfectly flush with the baffle but that is just me. Some guys have much higher visual standards than I.

Well- without beating thy chest- I knew that was precisely what h was talking about but- personally- find it fantastically trivial, and I for one care a great deal about how things "look". I don't pull this opinion out of the air, but rather after considering how small the difference is likely to be and more importantly how that difference will appear on a finished cabinet.

But I'm a bit in the dark regarding the gasket on other baskets...adding thickness is one thing..."width" though??? Does the gasket actually protrude beyond the mounting flange??? If so, that's dreadful...and prolly unnecessary if I'm picturing it correctly.

Then, even if you had a "custom" baffle for those kinds of drivers, would not the "tightness" of the baffle up against the gasket have its own problems, potentially?

James

Actual phone call (see pic to left):

Tech (responding to laughter): "I'm sorry sir, did I miss something?"

Me: "Yeah, a case of Diet Mountain Dew walking across my living room."

But I'm a bit in the dark regarding the gasket on other baskets...adding thickness is one thing..."width" though??? Does the gasket actually protrude beyond the mounting flange??? If so, that's dreadful...and prolly unnecessary if I'm picturing it correctly.
Then, even if you had a "custom" baffle for those kinds of drivers, would not the "tightness" of the baffle up against the gasket have its own problems, potentially?
James

Yes , the rubber gasket used on a lot of drivers add width and thickness around the mounting flange. They are also a pain in the a$$ when installing in a close tolerance recess cutout. I personally dont use the gaskets anymore because of these reasons.